Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lord Shonus]

Urist McGalileo gathers raw clear glass
Urist McGalileo gathers raw clear glass
Urist McGalileo gathers bronze bars
Urist McGalileo creates "Artifact McFakename" an artifact telescope.

[Iden]

I'm imagining a dwarf Socrates now.

Well.... The whole introduction of philosophy into Dwarf Fort certainly is a complex idea that would probably change a few basic dynamics of how dwarf society functions.

To boot, Socrates was by profession a Stonemason. He was a working man. He just had a knack for taking time off and sitting and reflecting upon life, people, and well... whatever else it is he reflected on. And he discussed his ideas readily with those he met with on his time off.

There's nothing stopping personality traits being thrown in such as Intellectual, Avid Thinker, Deep Thinker, Avid Debater, etc. Some skills he will have and develop are Persuader and Conversationalist, and maybe even a Debating skill.

On his breaks, this dwarf likes to go to common meeting grounds and hold intellectual conversation and have debates. He shares his ideas with others. Inevitably his ideas, if they make sense, begin to reach certain members of the dwarf society.

It could be similar to Attend Meeting: Attend Lecture, Attend Discussion, Attend Debate, Debating, Lecturing, etc.

Eventually he refines his views and shares them. Word spreads. More people agree with him. More people attend his lectures/debates.

A School of Thought is formed.

This is where it begins to get complicated. You need social dynamics for schools of thoughts. What school of thought is the basic dwarfen school of thought? What school of thought do the leaders/nobles of the dwarfen society belong to? What school of thought do the majority of the people of the fort belong to? How different is the school of thought being introduced -- is it a refinement of the current system, or is it a completely different thing?

Does a rift form in dwarf society? Does one group believe in one school of thought, one means to an end while another group strongly disagrees? This may spawn the creation of other rival schools of thought. It could be messy. Very interesting, no doubt, but messy.

Civil war would now become possible within ones fort. Invasion during civil war would spell disaster. Would the people unite in a hope of defending themselves, putting aside their differences, or would they fall a divided and failed people?

Would the people begin to refuse to do their jobs until change is ensured? Will the nobles appeal to this change or will they resist it? Are the people unified? Will they throw tantrums and riots and kill the nobles, and put new nobles in place? Will the nobles be split and some will side with the people and some with the nobility? Is it just a civil war between the working class?

It's a whole huge social/group dynamic that has yet to be explored and defined by Toady, and could honestly be very very dangerous. For larger forts this may be interesting and exciting. Risk vs. reward. I think this could be really cool. A lot of it would depend purely on dumb chance and how things develop randomly and progress. There's no guarantee of civil war, maybe things work out perfectly fine and peachy and everyone gets along better than ever!

Maybe a few dwarfs form a green party and a few of them refuse to use wood for any means. Could they protest logging? Could they vandalize wood-users? Or hunting of animals? They'd maybe end up in jail?

Would you trap or kill off philosophers who believe in radical ideas before a school of thought forms in order to save yourself the trouble?

Could your nobles buy into a school of thought and elect a philosopher as an advisor, thus giving him "semi-noble" status in which he doesn't need to really work? Will the philosopher buy into it and accept that, or will he scoff at the idea and earn the scorn of the nobles for laughing in their faces at their silly ideas? Will your nobles jail him or try to kill him? Will the people beat him or try to kill him?


I realize i'm simply posing lots of thoughts/ideas in the form of questions. It's all I've got atm. Sorry.

[HatfieldCW]

Heheheh, talk to the kids about how the gods don't really exist outside of a blue line in the thoughts and preferences page.... HAMMERED.

[Iden]

Heheheh, talk to the kids about how the gods don't really exist outside of a blue line in the thoughts and preferences page.... HAMMERED.

Counter-culture ideas would be very interesting, imo. Especially to see how they're dealt with. Some dwarf societies may stand for some oddities in their culture, perhaps those practicing/preaching such eccentric ideas will lose friends and become hermits or outcasts.

They could inevitably gain new friends, and a following.

Of course if the School of Thought followed by the Dwarven Culture is not tolerant of counter-culture ideas... well....

STOP!
IT'S HAMMER TIME!

[atomfullerene]

Uristcrates is very thirsty
Uristcrates has drunk hemlock beer
Uristcrates has been struck down!

[Amalgam]

It seems that the most obvious thing for the philosopher to do would be to "invent" things. However, we would inevitably start to move towards tech trees if we started doing that, which doesn't seem in the spirit of DF. If there's any technology that's permitted within DF technological time frame, the dwarves should have it, hands down. They don't have to be the best at it, but they're industrious enough that they should at least be capable of using it. But what about mythical technologies? Things like damascus steel (okay, we have HFS for that, but still) and the like.

Also, if Toady ever puts in celestial bodies in DF the philosopher will be the first to be involved with the sky.

[thobal]

A group of Emigrants have left to live with the Elves.







I still think Philosophers should interfere with artifact creation when requested materials are not available or at least try and cure melancholic dwarves. Or create melancholic dwarves. 

[shackleton]

It'd be best if philosophizing was a skill. If it was legendary, and it combined with a 'creative' personality trait, the nobility should execute the philosopher.

[shadowclasper]

Actually. schools of thought could evolve based around the names of the dwarven philosophers in the game. Based on how those philosophers feel about each other, the schools of thought would react the same way, adding a new way for social dynamics to work.

[Ringmaster]

Firstly, sorry for the necro, I just thought up some new ideas.

• Firstly, philosophers should gradually build up their "school of thought" and when it reaches a certain number of  believers (Say, 10) then the philosopher should demand a "Meeting Room" be allocated to them to hold "Lectures". As the number of followers of their School of Thought increases, the higher the requirement for that meeting room is.
• Second, the interactions between philosophers and other members of society should be incredibly varied. To go in to my ideas for this, let's assume that "Schools of thought" are treated much the same way "Spheres" for deities are treated, e.g. A school of thought may have the idea of war as its basis, this is the same as a deity having a "Sphere" for war.
  
  Now, let's assume that dwarven personalities and religious/military/royal leaders get fleshed out a bit more. E.g. there are now priests, generals and Kings that don't drop dead of old age within the first year, along with fully functioning personalities for dwarves.
  
  So my suggestion goes thus: Schools of Thought, and the Philosopher(s) who created them, should gain members who have personalities that go well with the school. E.g. A dwarf who takes joy from slaughter would love a school of thought based around war, and hate a school of thought based around pacifism. Similarly, on a more personal level, philosophers should get bad or good thoughts from having someone powerful in their presence, e.g. a philosopher who created a school of thought based around atheism would get a bad thought from being in the presence of the Head Priest(ess).
• A Fortress should be able to have more than one philosopher. These should either "debate" with each other periodically if they have schools of thought based around different principles, or they should philosophise with each other, becoming friends quite quickly (If they are male and female then they should become lovers eventually). Occasionally, two different schools of thought should hold massive debates in the same room, depending on the basis of a particular school of thought (E.g. if something is based around war and conflict) then at the end it could devolve in to violence, leading to hammerings/jailings and a harsher punishment for the philosopher whose school initiated the violence.
• Interactions between the nobility and philosophers should be complex. In general, nobles would dislike all of these "counter cultural" ideas of the philosophers and will probably try and distract people from going to Lectures and Debates via holding parties. Nobles who have grudges against the philosophers or who just really dislike a school of thought should be much harsher on followers of the school and the philosopher they hate. They will take every chance they get to punish them, e.g a mandate going ignored will inevitably lead to a follower being punished, even if they are a woodworker and the mandate was for silver items.

That's all I have for now.
[/list]

[Lav]

I like the Ringmaster's ideas.

One thing to add, however. Perhaps switching between different economical models could depend on philosopher and not on population cap.

Several economical models could potentially be introduced, and the switch between them could be randomized for extra fun. :-)

[Rowanas]

I don't think all interactions between opposing groups should be negative. I very much enjoy debating with religious and democratic people because occasionally they put up a fair fight and the rest of the time they amuse me. Based on personality, obviously.

[darkflagrance]

There's nothing stopping personality traits being thrown in such as Intellectual, Avid Thinker, Deep Thinker, Avid Debater, etc. Some skills he will have and develop are Persuader and Conversationalist, and maybe even a Debating skill.

There is one personality trait like this already in Dwarf Fortress. Some dwarves "hate intellectual discussions" (their value for this trait is low), while others are "open to debate and new ideas".

Going with the School of Thought ideas, I think the current noble position of "Philosopher" is really no more than a placeholder, similar to the current Dungeon Master we have now (when guilds come back, the Dungeon Master as we know him will cease to exist).

Rather, some dwarves should be capable of evolving schools of thought, which then affect the preferences that dwarves have, and how they live their lives, as well as how they respond to things. What can make up a school of thought would be a list of predefined, hardcoded philosophical concepts which have specific effects.

In this system, as Iden expressed above, philosophical thoughts might be had by any dwarf inclined to thinking. Theoretically any dwarf could be a philosopher.

For example, dwarves who follow a school that touts the concept of "Reincarnation" might not be so sad if another dwarf dies, or might not be so cruel to goblins. "Stoic" dwarves might not be as likely to tantrum if a couple of soap makers happen to get crushed by a bridge. Agreement with a School of Thought could be listed on a dwarf's screen where belief in a deity currently is.

There might then be an appointed "Royal Philosopher" (or some other such name), whose School of Thought is dominant in the fortress, or who has the best mastery of the dominant School of Thought. His job would be to educate others, or perhaps to develop the School of Thought by adding or removing philosophical concepts. There might even be suppression of other schools of thought not endorsed by the state, as is common under authoritarian rule.

I don't think all interactions between opposing groups should be negative. I very much enjoy debating with religious and democratic people because occasionally they put up a fair fight and the rest of the time they amuse me. Based on personality, obviously.

This is Dwarf Fortress.

Common peasants are dragged out of the streets and hammered to death because the Countess didn't get her pair of Crystal Glass goblets.

It makes sense that dwarven philosophy would cause pointless violence and bloodshed.

[Safe-Keeper]

I'm imagining a dwarf Socrates now.

Not until poison is added to the game, you ain't .

[Iden]

I'm imagining a dwarf Socrates now.

Not until poison is added to the game, you ain't .

Dwarf Socrates needs no such poison. He'll just drink himself to death.

(and it works too, because he'd be remembered for his dwarfy sacrifice!)